A leading condom manufacturer in Switzerland has created extra-small condoms for boys as young as 12 years old, the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph reported.

The condom, called the Hotshot, was produced after family planning groups and the Swiss AIDS Federation campaigned to have the condoms made following several studies that showed adolescent boys were not using proper protection when engaging in intercourse.

"The result that shocked us concerned young boys who display apparently risky behavior,” Nancy Bodmer, who headed the research, told the newspaper. “They have more of a tendency not to protect themselves. They do not have a very developed sexual knowledge. They do not understand the consequences of what they are doing and leave the young girls to take care of the consequences.”

Bodmer said the results of the study suggest that early prevention makes sense.

A spokeswoman for the company, Lamprecht AG, said the United Kingdom would be a “top priority” if they expanded abroad, especially since the U.K. has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in Europe.

A standard condom has a diameter of 2 inches; the Hotshot's is 1.7 inches.

__________________"Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man! We shall this day light such a candle, by God's grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out."
--Hugh Latimer, October 16, 1555

I think even the best parents will end up having kids who engage in sex. The temptation is too strong for any type of parenting to be 100% effective. You can do a great job and hope for the best, but the truth is, some kids will still experiment. Especially with boys. If they get the chance, most likely they'll go for it.

I agree you should do your best to encourage them to wait, but also educate them to use protection if they decide to do it anyway.

Then again, this whole "condom for 12 year olds" might just be a polite way of making condoms for the less than gifted men out there. A grown man with a teenie weenie can buy these and just claim their for "his son".

I think even the best parents will end up having kids who engage in sex. The temptation is too strong for any type of parenting to be 100% effective. You can do a great job and hope for the best, but the truth is, some kids will still experiment. Especially with boys. If they get the chance, most likely they'll go for it.

I agree you should do your best to encourage them to wait, but also educate them to use protection if they decide to do it anyway.

Well, it is possible to successfully teach kids to abstain from sex. My brother and I were not sexually active at all when we were under 18, but that was because my parents took a very active role in teaching us about sex early on and monitoring what we watched on TV and who we spent our time with outside of school.

To say "you need to abstain from sex, but just in case you feel the urge, then you should use a condom" completely destroys any message of abstinence.

Let's see if we can apply that logic to other moral issues:

"You should never commit murder, but just in case someone really pisses you off, then shoot them in the head because it's quick and painless."

"You should never steal, but just in case you really really want something, then make sure it costs less than $3000, because you won't be charged with a felony."

"You should never beat your wife, but just in case you lose your temper and can't control yourself, then use a bar of soap wrapped in a towel because it won't leave any marks."

Now I don't think anyone would be mistaken for a good parent if they taught their children those philosophies. So why should a person who teaches their children to be slaves to their sexual urges be considered a good or responsible parent?

I agree with Spirit, parents need to be stricter with their kids and quit trying to be their "friends".

Although, no matter how great the parents are, they are still likely to get a rebel in the family that just won't listen to their guidance. I think this is especially true in large families, I'm one of 5 and my husband is one of 4, all raised Catholic and both families had a more "rebellious" kid than the rest (rebellious being a generous word but I didn't want to say "black sheep" as all of us have turned our reasonably sane).

Well, it is possible to successfully teach kids to abstain from sex. My brother and I were not sexually active at all when we were under 18, but that was because my parents took a very active role in teaching us about sex early on and monitoring what we watched on TV and who we spent our time with outside of school.

To say "you need to abstain from sex, but just in case you feel the urge, then you should use a condom" completely destroys any message of abstinence.

Let's see if we can apply that logic to other moral issues:

"You should never commit murder, but just in case someone really pisses you off, then shoot them in the head because it's quick and painless."

"You should never steal, but just in case you really really want something, then make sure it costs less than $3000, because you won't be charged with a felony."

"You should never beat your wife, but just in case you lose your temper and can't control yourself, then use a bar of soap wrapped in a towel because it won't leave any marks."
Now I don't think anyone would be mistaken for a good parent if they taught their children those philosophies. So why should a person who teaches their children to be slaves to their sexual urges be considered a good or responsible parent?